In re Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission of Rubin

Supreme Court of Rhode Island

In re Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission of Rubin

786 A.2d 1075, 2001 R.I. LEXIS 244, 2001 WL 1678878

CourtSupreme Court of Rhode Island

DecidedOctober 30, 2001

DocketNo. 01-455-M.P.

StatusPublished

This text of 786 A.2d 1075 (In re Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission of Rubin) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Rhode Island primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission of Rubin, 786 A.2d 1075, 2001 R.I. LEXIS 244, 2001 WL 1678878 (R.I. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

Petitioner Owens-Illinois, Inc. (Owens) moves for admission pro hac vice of Maine attorneys Peter J. Rubin (Rubin) and Todd S. Holbrook (Holbrook) to represent petitioner in Rhode Island in pending and future actions against petitioner in the so-called Rhode Island Asbestos Litigation. Approximately 65 such cases are presently pending in the Superior Court. Attorney Rubin acknowledges that he has obtained pro hac vice admission to appear on behalf of Owens in 89 previous asbestos cases in Rhode Island, while Attorney Holbrook acknowledges approximately 73 such admissions within the last five (5) years.

Upon review thereof, we conclude that this motion is tantamount to an omnibus request by these nonresident attorneys to practice law in this state. Supreme Court Article II, Rule 9 and our Provisional Order No. 19 permit pro hac vice admission on “special and infrequent occasion” only and mandate a separate petition and filing fee for each attorney requesting such admission, and/or for each case in respect to which such admission is sought. The relief requested here clearly exceeds the limitations which our rule places on pro hac vice practice in Rhode Island.

Accordingly, the motion for pro hac vice admission is denied.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ORDER

Petitioner Owens-Illinois, Inc. (Owens) moves for admission pro hac vice of Maine attorneys Peter J. Rubin (Rubin) and Todd S. Holbrook (Holbrook) to represent petitioner in Rhode Island in pending and future actions against petitioner in the so-called Rhode Island Asbestos Litigation. Approximately 65 such cases are presently pending in the Superior Court. Attorney Rubin acknowledges that he has obtained pro hac vice admission to appear on behalf of Owens in 89 previous asbestos cases in Rhode Island, while Attorney Holbrook acknowledges approximately 73 such admissions within the last five (5) years.

Upon review thereof, we conclude that this motion is tantamount to an omnibus request by these nonresident attorneys to practice law in this state. Supreme Court Article II, Rule 9 and our Provisional Order No. 19 permit pro hac vice admission on “special and infrequent occasion” only and mandate a separate petition and filing fee for each attorney requesting such admission, and/or for each case in respect to which such admission is sought. The relief requested here clearly exceeds the limitations which our rule places on pro hac vice practice in Rhode Island.

Accordingly, the motion for pro hac vice admission is denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

786 A.2d 1075, 2001 R.I. LEXIS 244, 2001 WL 1678878, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-motion-for-pro-hac-vice-admission-of-rubin-ri-2001.